Var debate 2019/20

[pardoeofftomexico]

Most worrying thing about this is that ‘expert’ referees and players are so eager to back the officials and the system that they ignore the rules. Ignorance of the rules is disgraceful but so, too, is the reluctance of those in the booth to question the referee. The ball hit his chest and then his arm so not a penalty. The referee presumably thought the ball had struck his arm first and that is a clear and obvious error. The decision should have been reviewed and overturned.

If they can make such mistakes in the biggest game in European football, Heaven help us in August.

The defender may consider himself very unlucky but it meets the conditions for a penalty set out by UEFA for this competition earlier in the season. In fact, I think it would have always been a penalty. His arm was in an unnatural position and he even brought it down to connect with the ball. All I can say is that if anyone can't see that was a penalty then after the first week of next season this thread will be a thousand pages long particularly if it involves a City player!

 

[Neville Kneville]

Haven't seen the game, & never will, but from reading about the incident, it appears to fall in with what many of us predicted would happen, when it was announced.

The teams who get the most 'breaks' from refs, will get the most 'breaks' from v.a.r. & whenever a tight one goes against any of them, there will be such a public outcry that they don't lose a similar one for a long time.

Most 'close' v.a.r. decisions will go in favour of Utd & Liverpool next season.

 

[thelongbowman]

I thought VAR would help the game. It hasn't. It should only be used for objective decisions such a off side and ball positions similar to goal line technology. As soon as a matter has an element of subjectivity the decision has to be with the referee. This stopping the game thing and some unknown dick in a separate country advising the ref is a nonsense.

To prevent travesties of justice I would allow each team an appeal per half which would stop incidents of gross unfairness in their tracks.

VAR as it stands is not fit for purpose.

 

[Marvin]

If we had VAR this season, would we have been champions.

Does it add or remove bias / error? Open to question

 

[Gabriel]

The defender may consider himself very unlucky but it meets the conditions for a penalty set out by UEFA for this competition earlier in the season. In fact, I think it would have always been a penalty. His arm was in an unnatural position and he even brought it down to connect with the ball. All I can say is that if anyone can't see that was a penalty then after the first week of next season this thread will be a thousand pages long particularly if it involves a City player!

Assuming the rule quoted above and elsewhere online remains the pertinent one, “it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)” then it all depends whether the ball strikes another part of the defender’s body before striking his arm. Had the ball struck his arm directly, then a penalty no doubt, but the fact that it hit his body and then arm should have seen it deemed no penalty. The problem with this wording is the insertion of the word ‘usually’, as that leaves it entirely at the discretion and interpretation of the officials and, thus, subjective.

 

[pardoeofftomexico]

Assuming the rule quoted above and elsewhere online remains the pertinent one, “it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)” then it all depends whether the ball strikes another part of the defender’s body before striking his arm. Had the ball struck his arm directly, then a penalty no doubt, but the fact that it hit his body and then arm should have seen it deemed no penalty. The problem with this wording is the insertion of the word ‘usually’, as that leaves it entirely at the discretion and interpretation of the officials and, thus, subjective.

I think the rule you are quoting is the one for next year although I think that a penalty would still be given. I think what the logical answer should be is that if his arm had been beside him then no penalty but to have your arm above your head and then bring it down making contact with the ball should logically be a penalty.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

If we had VAR this season, would we have been champions.

Does it add or remove bias / error? Open to question

Alternatively , would the dippers have got so many penalties and off-side goals and been much further behind us ?

Edit that , because I expect certain clubs to still get the dubious decisions.

 

[Newman Noggs]

If we had VAR this season, would we have been champions.

Does it add or remove bias / error? Open to question

We'll be able to judge at the season's end. My prediction is;

1. We'll have more goals disallowed following the use of VAR than any other top 6 side
2. We'll have more penalties awarded against us following the use of VAR than any other top 6 side

If that happens, we'll know.

 

[ballinio]

Haven't seen the game, & never will, but from reading about the incident, it appears to fall in with what many of us predicted would happen, when it was announced.

The teams who get the most 'breaks' from refs, will get the most 'breaks' from v.a.r. & whenever a tight one goes against any of them, there will be such a public outcry that they don't lose a similar one for a long time.

Most 'close' v.a.r. decisions will go in favour of Utd & Liverpool next season.

Of course they will, i’m Not looking forward to next season .

 

[Gabriel]

I think the rule you are quoting is the one for next year although I think that a penalty would still be given. I think what the logical answer should be is that if his arm had been beside him then no penalty but to have your arm above your head and then bring it down making contact with the ball should logically be a penalty.

Not sure. I think the rule was in operation last night and have seen it quoted as such in a number of publications today. It makes sense, as it would give some leeway for shots that deflect (e.g. Micah Richards at Anfield) but not balls that hit an arm directly. By their rule that was not a penalty unless they are using ‘usually’ to qualify their decisions, but that opens up the question of what constitutes ‘usual’ and contrariwise what constitutes ‘unusual’.

The whole notion of what ‘unnatural’ means in terms of arm position in sport is ridiculous, but their rule, if applied properly, should be comprehensible and consistent. I fear it will, however, lead to a spate of penalties at the start of the season when attacking players deliberately target hitting arms in the box.